Scientists: We Will Find Alien Life

ATSZOMBIE
No there isn't, its quite reasonable to surmise that if there IS Alien life out there, its been around before us and after us. Given that when it
happens, we can assume a race MILLIONS of years ahead of us now could well travel here without any problem at all.

You can assume that, but you are making an assumption based on no solid ground. There may be/may have been/may will be at some point sentient life
elsewhere in this galaxy, never mind this universe, but why do you assume it could travel here with no problems at all? Crocodiles have been on this
planet longer than us, I believe by millions of years, but do you see any of them popping over to the next solar system, yet they are sentient. You
are letting your own belief system rule your logic.

You are right though, it is reasonable to assume life exists elsewhere in the universe, I've been on ATS under different user names for a few years
and I'm not sure I've seen many people who doubt that assumption. What most people have questioned is if that assumption in any way means that that
life has visited this planet or would have any inclination to actually do so - assuming they had the means to know there is any form of life here (and
if they did, maybe they were more interested in talking to the dolphins).

Lets just say we stopped all the research into other galaxies , stars , the question of are we alone etc and concentrated all that money and
brainpower in trying to solely benefit mankind for 200 years. 200 years is less than a drop in the ocean in the big scheme of things. In 200 years
technology would advance so vastly that what we are trying to achieve today with space exploration that's costing billions of dollars is going to cost
a lot less. We could pick up where we left off at a much reduced cost to everyone.

First of, the amount of money spent on this stuff is very small when you consider the total budget. Do you know how much is spent on this stuff? less
than 1/1000th of the federal budget It would not benefit anyone one iota to spread it out thinly on whatever YOU deem would benefit mankind better.

You make an assumption this research has no benefit to mankind, and you would be wrong. Besides the actual discoveries plenty of technology has spun
off it that has other every day applications.

Secondly, let me remind you of history.

At one time China had the world's greatest navy. Chinese junks sailed even to the west coast of the US 70 years before Columbus. The emperor ordered
them burned, presumably for similar reasons as you want to burn space exploration.

What happened? Some guy named Columbus gets credit for "discovering" the Americas. China fell behind the west technologically.

Its taken China from then, until now to regain that sense of exploration.

That's what you're advocating. Think about how dumb that sounds now.

Beyond that, you have no idea of what "billions and billions" is really spent on. Go take your money from the military who have ships and aircraft
which cost billions and billions which in some cases they don't even want.

The emperor ordered them burned, presumably for similar reasons as you want to burn space exploration.

You are making an assumption which is incorrect.

What happened? Some guy named Columbus gets credit for "discovering" the Americas. China fell behind the west technologically.

There was no technology in the America's to be discovered. Europe pushed forward the technological advances which spread to America.

Trying to compare the discovery of a country that takes a few months to travel to to spending billions on trying to find an answer to a question that
wont benefit us at all in our daily lives is asinine. Now if we had the technology to get to the stars like the Chinese had the technology to get to
America then it might be worth perusing at this stage.

Most people think there's life out there anyway knowing for sure wont make a blind bit of difference to our daily lives. The economy will still be
bad in fact no better off at all after all the money we spent finding out..

The emperor ordered them burned, presumably for similar reasons as you want to burn space exploration.

You are making an assumption which is incorrect.

What happened? Some guy named Columbus gets credit for "discovering" the Americas. China fell behind the west technologically.

There was no technology in the America's to be discovered. Europe pushed forward the technological advances which spread to America.

Trying to compare the discovery of a country that takes a few months to travel to to spending billions on trying to find an answer to a question that
wont benefit us at all in our daily lives is asinine. Now if we had the technology to get to the stars like the Chinese had the technology to get to
America then it might be worth perusing at this stage.

Most people think there's life out there anyway knowing for sure wont make a blind bit of difference to our daily lives. The economy will still be
bad in fact no better off at all after all the money we spent finding out..

edit on 7-12-2013 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)

You are both historically, scientifically and factually ignorant. I see no further point in discussing this with you, sorry. I suggest you actually
research the federal budget and where most of the technology you're using right now came from (hint hint, the space program pushed it) before spouting
off nonsense though.

Please show me the technology that was discovered in America when they landed? America was simply an extension of Europe using all their knowledge
until they went independent. If the chinese had got their first they would have just had another place to live using their existing technologies.

I suggest you actually research the federal budget and where most of the technology you're using right now came from (hint hint, the space program
pushed it) before spouting off nonsense though.

So on one hand you are trying to say that almost none of the space program is about finding life in the universe so i shouldn't include its costs in
my argument and then on the other hand you want to use it in your argument by saying the costs in the space program are worth it as it has given us
inventions that benefit mankind.

Funny you should mention ignorance...Hypocrisy much?

Most of our tech comes from DARPA which is deference based if you want to talk about getting your facts right

Yes i agree with you to an extent. But particle physics does have some real world application in the communications field as well as general materials
and even computing.

I don't think so. What you're referring to is actually accelerator physics, which is sub-discipline of engineering physics and has nothing to do
with particle physics. Most accelerator physicists don't have a strong handle on the standard model of particle physics, and similarly, most particle
physicists only have a real basic understanding of how the accelerators actually work. One could make the argument funding these different disciplines
separately could have produced the same results and even more applications than funding particle accelerators if we're strictly talking in terms of
practical applications. As far as I know, there aren't any engineering applications that rely on the fact that protons are made of three quarks or
the existence of neutrinos. Particle physics has been around for several decades, and has yet to produce any significant practical application that
relies on its principles. Given that, it's extremely unlikely that physics beyond particle physics will ever lead to anything practical. Does that
mean we should stop researching fundamental physics and stick purely to the low-energy quantum mechanical regime? As Feynmann put it, "Physics is
like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it."

PhoenixODBut lets face it here the technology needed to try to answer the question of are we alone is probably some of the most
expensive in the world. And for what ? its either yes or no. Neither of those answers are going to make a blind bit of difference to you and me in our
daily lives.

The higgs boson was also a "yes" or "no". If you're using the spinoffs argument to justify it, then one could also make a reasonable case for the
potential spinoff technology that come from basic astronomy. Many of the advanced signal processing techniques that are commonly used in industry
trace their origins to astronomy.

I don't care what they find in space and I don't care if aliens are found in space. The reason for space exploration is because it is there. What
are we bugs that have to stick to this planet like roaches? There is a big universe out there and only mental cowards would fear to venture out. What
will it cost? NO that is not the right question - The right question is how much will be made and what will be gained. Pioneering space companies
such as SpaceX and Orbital Sciences, and of course Branson are busy turning space travel and exploration and even tourism into profitable enterprise.
Men climb mountains because they are there; Men explore because that is human nature and 'Space, the final frontier" is no exception. Whether we
will find aliens or aliens will find us is open to interesting speculation but as I say space exploration should be a given in any case.

“Since, in the long run, every planetary civilization will be endangered by impacts from space, every surviving civilization is obliged to become
spacefaring--not because of exploratory or romantic zeal, but for the most practical reason imaginable: staying alive... If our long-term survival is
at stake, we have a basic responsibility to our species to venture to other worlds.”
― Carl Sagan

“We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will
serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling
to postpone, and one which we intend to win.”
― John F. Kennedy

charlyv
Allan Hills 84001, the martian meteorite found in Antartica in 1984, most likely has Martian microbes in it.
Some scientists put it at 99.99%, but until you get that absolute 100%, they will not bless it.

As far as I am concerned, it's already a done deal, next?

Actually it isn't. That was another case where the initial paper grabbed attention but the rebuttals simply are not covered by the media, which leads
to the impression by the general public that we've already found alien life.

charlyv
Allan Hills 84001, the martian meteorite found in Antartica in 1984, most likely has Martian microbes in it.
Some scientists put it at 99.99%, but until you get that absolute 100%, they will not bless it.

As far as I am concerned, it's already a done deal, next?

Actually it isn't. That was another case where the initial paper grabbed attention but the rebuttals simply are not covered by the media, which leads
to the impression by the general public that we've already found alien life.

Thanks for that! And I am sorry, its tricky to know what level the conversation is at on this forum at any given point. Early on I referred to papers
on arxiv and found most of that over people's heads. I only used wikipedia because I saw that was the convention around here.

I'm very interested in this new research, particularly if there is something which doesn't rely on morphology as evidence in support of it.

I don't know if you saw but AH84001 affected me on a personal level and is why I want to go into astrobiology rather than medicine so please keep
posting stuff along these lines here

In 1952, Dr. Gilbert V. Levin invented a rapid, highly sensitive method to detect microbial contamination of water and food. In 1958, he obtained a
NASA contract to develop the method to seek extraterrestrial life. The method was selected in 1969 for use on NASA’s 1976 Viking Mission to Mars.
Originally named “Gulliver,” for the Lilliputians (microorganisms) it was seeking, it was renamed the “Labeled Release (LR)” experiment by
NASA to indicate the technology used – the release of radioactive gas from radio-labeled compounds in the event they were metabolized by
microorganisms in the Martian soil. Simply put, the LR squirted a drop of carefully designed radioactive food onto a tiny cup of Martian soil and
monitored the air above the soil to detect radioactive gas that any microorganisms present might breathe out. Levin and his co-workers, notably Dr.
Patricia Ann Straat, then spent the next decade developing the experiment and instrument, and in analyzing the results obtained from its successful
operation on Mars. At both landing sites, some 4,000 miles apart, the LR returned evidence of living microorganisms. Initially discounted by NASA and
most space scientists, the results of this milestone project have, nonetheless, been causing excitement and controversy ever since. In 1997, after 21
years of study of the Mars LR results, of new information scientists obtained about environmental conditions on Mars, and of the extreme environments
in which life was found on Earth, Dr. Levin published his conclusion that the LR had, indeed, discovered living microorganisms on the Red Planet.
Levin first presented his conclusion in an invited talk at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for Optical Engineering (SPIE) on July 30,
1997, in San Diego. On July 20, 1998, he presented another paper with new findings supporting that conclusion. Many attempts have been made since then
by other authors to explain the Mars LR results as having been caused by chemical or physical reactions between the LR nutrients and the soil. No one,
however, has duplicated the full experimental results the LR obtained on Mars. In recent years, there have been many important converts to the life
theory, possibly the fore-runner of a major paradigm shift in humanity’s continual search for its place in the universe.
Below are his publications related to Mars. They are presented in chronological order, from the early up to the latest scientific findings by him and
others related to this intriguing issue, the resolution of which, as termed by NASA, would be “the greatest experiment in the history of
science.”
GILBERT LEVIN, Ph.D.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.